+1, verified that my previous findings are fixed. On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 8:17 AM Chamikara Jayalath <chamik...@google.com> wrote:
> +1 (binding) > > Ran some Python scenarios and updated the spreadsheet. > > Thanks, > Cham > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 3:39 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 3:24 PM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >>> The artifacts and signatures look good to me. +1 (binding) >>> >>> (The release branch still has the .dev name, maybe you didn't push? >>> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/release-2.29.0/sdks/python/apache_beam/version.py >>> ) >>> >> >> Good point. I'll highlight that I finally implemented the branching >> changes from >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/205472bdaf3c2c5876533750d417c19b0d1078131a3dc04916082ce8%40%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E >> >> The new guide with diagram is here: >> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/release-guide/#tag-a-chosen-commit-for-the-rc >> >> TL;DR: >> - the release branch continues to be dev/SNAPSHOT for 2.29.0 while the >> main branch is now dev/SNAPSHOT for 2.30.0 >> - the RC tag v2.29.0-RC1 no longer lies on the release branch. It is a >> single tagged commit that removes the dev/SNAPSHOT suffix >> >> Kenn >> >> >>> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 10:36 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Please take another look. >>>> >>>> - I re-ran the RC creation script so the source release and wheels are >>>> new and built from the RC tag. I confirmed the source zip and wheels have >>>> version 2.29.0 (not .dev or -SNAPSHOT). >>>> - I fixed and rebuilt Dataflow worker container images from exactly >>>> the RC commit, added dataclasses, with internal changes to get the version >>>> to match. >>>> - I confirmed that the staged jars already have version 2.29.0 (not >>>> -SNAPSHOT). >>>> - I confirmed with `diff -r -q` that the source tarball matches the RC >>>> tag (minus the .git* files and directories and gradlew) >>>> >>>> Kenn >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 9:19 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> At this point, the release train has just about come around to 2.30.0 >>>>> which will pick up that change. I don't think it makes sense to >>>>> cherry-pick >>>>> anything more into 2.29.0 unless it is nonfunctional. As it is, I think we >>>>> have a good commit and just need to build the expected artifacts. Since it >>>>> isn't all the artifacts, I was planning on just overwriting the RC1 >>>>> artifacts in question and re-verify. I could also roll a new RC2 from the >>>>> same commit fairly easily. >>>>> >>>>> Kenn >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 8:57 PM Reuven Lax <re...@google.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Any chance we could include https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14548 >>>>>> ? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 8:54 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> To clarify: I am running and fixing the release scripts on the >>>>>>> `master` branch. They work from fresh clones of the RC tag so this >>>>>>> should >>>>>>> work in most cases. The exception is the GitHub Actions configuration, >>>>>>> which I cherrypicked >>>>>>> to the release branch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Kenn >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 8:34 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK it sounds like I need to re-roll the artifacts in question. I >>>>>>>> don't think anything raised here indicates a problem with the tagged >>>>>>>> commit, but with the state of the release scripts at the time I built >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> earlier artifacts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 1:03 PM Robert Bradshaw < >>>>>>>> rober...@google.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It looks like the wheels are also versioned "2.29.0.dev". >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Not sure if it's important, but the source tarball also seems to >>>>>>>>> contain some release script changes that are not reflected in the >>>>>>>>> github >>>>>>>>> branch. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 8:41 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the details, Valentyn & Cham. I will fix the Dataflow >>>>>>>>>> worker containers then update this thread. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Kenn >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 8:36 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 3:42 AM Elliotte Rusty Harold < >>>>>>>>>>> elh...@ibiblio.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 4:02 AM Kenneth Knowles < >>>>>>>>>>>> k...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > The complete staging area is available for your review, which >>>>>>>>>>>> includes: >>>>>>>>>>>> > * JIRA release notes [1], >>>>>>>>>>>> > * the official Apache source release to be deployed to >>>>>>>>>>>> dist.apache.org [2], which is signed with the key with >>>>>>>>>>>> fingerprint 03DBA3E6ABDD04BFD1558DC16ED551A8AE02461C [3], >>>>>>>>>>>> > * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central >>>>>>>>>>>> Repository [4], >>>>>>>>>>>> > * source code tag "v2.29.0-RC1" [5], >>>>>>>>>>>> > * website pull request listing the release [6], publishing >>>>>>>>>>>> the API reference manual [7], and the blog post [8]. >>>>>>>>>>>> > * Java artifacts were built with Maven MAVEN_VERSION and >>>>>>>>>>>> OpenJDK/Oracle JDK JDK_VERSION. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Are the MAVEN_VERSION and OpenJDK/Oracle JDK JDK_VERSION >>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to >>>>>>>>>>>> be filled in with numbers? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I missed that these were variables to be replaced. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> JDK_VERSION=8u181 (1.8) and the Gradle version is taken from the >>>>>>>>>>> gradlew config so no need to include in the template, but it is 6.8 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kenn >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Elliotte Rusty Harold >>>>>>>>>>>> elh...@ibiblio.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
